2020 PROGRESS UPDATE: METOO WORKPLACE REFORMS IN THE STATES

NATIONAL WOMEN’S LAW CENTER | 20 STATES BY 2020

BY ANDREA JOHNSON, RAMYA SEKARAN, SASHA GOMBAR | SEPTEMBER 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. ENSURING ALL WORKING PEOPLE ARE COVERED BY HARASSMENT PROTECTIONS 6 Protecting more workers 6 Covering more employers 7

II. RESTORING WORKER POWER AND INCREASING EMPLOYER TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY 8 Limiting nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) 8 Prohibiting no-rehire provisions 10 Stopping forced arbitration 11 Protecting those who speak up from defamation lawsuits 12 Transparency about harassment claims 12 Limiting the use of public funds in settlements 13

III. EXPANDING ACCESS TO JUSTICE 15 Extending statutes of limitations 15 Establishing discrimination and harassment helplines 15 Ensuring rights to be free from harassment can be enforced 16 Revising the “severe or pervasive” liability standard 16 Closing a loophole in employer liability 17 Ensuring employer liability for supervisor harassment 17 Redressing harm to victims of harassment 17

IV. PROMOTING PREVENTION STRATEGIES 19 Requiring anti-harassment training 19 Requiring strong anti-harassment policies 20 Requiring notice of employee rights 21 Requiring climate surveys 21

SURVIVOR - AND WORKER-LED ADVOCACY IN THE STATES ¡YA BASTA! Coalition: Ending sexual violence against janitors 7 Former New York legislative staffers bring about sweeping change 14 Hotel workers demand panic buttons 18

PAGE 1 SEPTEMBER 2020 |  #METOO

INTRODUCTION

Three years after #MeToo went viral, the unleashed loss for Black women and Latinas.2 And the Movement power of survivor voices has led to more than for Black Lives has shined a light on the many forms 230 bills being introduced in state legislatures to of oppression that Black women, Indigenous women, strengthen protections against workplace harassment and other women of color continue to face at work, and a remarkable 19 states enacting new protections. often including shockingly low wages and poor working Although many of these laws are just starting to take conditions—inequities that the COVID-19 crisis has further effect, initial reports from the ground show both that exacerbated. Without a safety net or optimism about they are making a difference in many crucial ways, their chances of finding another job, workers are more but that this progress is incomplete. Indeed, states desperate to keep a paycheck at any cost and less willing have been slow to adopt some of the reforms that to report workplace abuses, increasing their vulnerability promise to make the biggest difference for those to harassment, discrimination, exploitation, abuse, most marginalized by harassment and for preventing and retaliation at work. Recognizing this, legislators in workplace harassment. states like North Carolina3 have continued to introduce legislation to strengthen workplace anti-discrimination As state legislative sessions began in 2020, energy and anti-harassment laws as part of the effort to rebuild remained high for advancing Me Too reforms. from COVID-19.4 Nearly 400 state legislators from 42 states and the District of Columbia—from both sides of the aisle— This report provides an updated overview of the joined the #20StatesBy2020 pledge declaring their progress that has been made in advancing workplace commitment to supporting and working with survivors anti-harassment reforms in the states from October to strengthen protections against sexual harassment 2017 to September 2020, as well as in New York City in 20 states by 2020.1 which has been especially active in strengthening its anti-harassment laws. The report also highlights some of The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic stalled much the stories of how survivors have led the push for these of this momentum as many state legislatures abruptly important state law reforms. shut down or shifted to emergency relief efforts just three months into 2020. At the same time, the need CLOSING IN ON WORKPLACE HARASSMENT for strong workplace anti-discrimination and anti- LAW REFORM IN #20STATESBY2020 harassment laws is clearer and more urgent than At a time when partisan politics seems to have reached a ever. COVID-19 unleashed an economic recession that fever pitch, the Me Too movement has seen conservative hit women hardest, with especially high levels of job and progressive state legislators alike, in states from

PAGE 2 Tennessee to Oregon, speaking out and pushing for long PROGRESS SLOW ON REFORMS THAT WOULD HAVE overdue reforms to anti-harassment laws, many of them HIGHEST IMPACT FOR WORKERS MOST IN NEED OF motivated and united by their own Me Too stories. Many of PROTECTIONS the Me Too workplace reforms have passed with bipartisan Workers in low-wage jobs—who are disproportionately support. Major trends in the new reforms include the women of color and immigrant women—experience some of following: the highest rates of workplace harassment and most severe repercussions for speaking out.5 They should be the priority • 15 STATES LIMITED OR PROHIBITED EMPLOYERS from focus of workplace policy reforms, and yet, since #MeToo requiring employees to sign nondisclosure agreements went viral, only Illinois, Maryland, New York, and Vermont as a condition of employment or as part of a settlement have been able to pass the most basic and crucial reform— agreement. ensuring that the many low-paid gig workers, domestic workers, home healthcare workers, and other workers who • 11 STATES AND NEW YORK CITY IMPLEMENTED OR work for smaller employers or as independent contractors STRENGTHENED ANTI-HARASSMENT TRAINING have legal protections against workplace harassment requirements for certain employers. Likewise, only California, Oregon, and New York meaningfully • 7 STATES ENACTED MEASURES TO REQUIRE OR extended their statute of limitations for bringing a workplace ENCOURAGE EMPLOYER ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICIES harassment claim to three or more years, even though initial • 7 STATES LIMITED EMPLOYERS’ USE OF FORCED reports from jurisdictions that recently enacted this reform ARBITRATION, though several of these laws are being emphasize that it has been especially important for workers challenged in court. in low-wage jobs, who otherwise are often forced to choose between using their time to get another job to support their • 6 STATES EXPANDED WORKPLACE HARASSMENT family or finding legal counsel, bringing a harassment claim, PROTECTIONS to include independent contractors, and seeking justice. The necessity of this reform has grown interns, and/or volunteers for the first time. even more urgent with the COVID-19 crisis limiting access to courts and agencies and increasing the economic instability of so many workers.

In some states, important protections for low-wage workers were actually rolled back. In D.C. and Michigan, measures that raised the tipped minimum wage so tipped workers would no

PAGE 3 longer have to tolerate harassment from customers to make ends meet were repealed.6 THE BE HEARD IN THE Reforms that would more fundamentally shift employers’ WORKPLACE ACT: A FEDERAL incentive and ability to prevent harassment have also BILL AND A MODEL FOR STATE proven challenging. Since #MeToo went viral, only ACTION California and New York have succeeded in updating the standard for what constitutes illegal workplace harassment and only Maryland, Delaware, and New York In April 2019, U.S. Representative Katherine Clark have updated standards for when employers are liable and Senator Patty Murray introduced in Congress for that harassment. Existing standards have for too long the Bringing an End to Harassment by Enhancing allowed employers and courts to minimize and ignore Accountability and Rejecting Discrimination the impact and reality of workplace harassment and (BE HEARD) in the Workplace Act—a landmark, power dynamics, especially in low-paid workplaces. And comprehensive workplace anti-harassment bill.8 only Virginia, New York, and Connecticut have increased This bicameral bill has the support of 169 members the financial relief available to harassment victims to an of congress and over 50 civil rights, women’s amount that would meaningfully incentivize employers rights, and worker’s rights organizations. While to address and prevent harassment. Congress has yet to move the great majority of anti-harassment reforms that have been introduced Only Vermont and New York City have taken steps to since #MeToo went viral, BE HEARD can serve as require climate surveys in more workplaces, despite a legislative model for states looking to carry the the importance of such surveys in helping employers torch of Me Too workplace policy reform in the understand the prevalence of harassment in their face of congressional inaction. workforce and providing an important anonymous Specifically, the BE HEARD in the Workplace Act channel for workers to raise concerns. And even the would: policies passed by Vermont and New York City are relatively modest. • extend protections against harassment and other forms of discrimination to all workers; Finally, while much progress was made in 2019 and 2020 • remove barriers to access to justice, such as in response to workers and survivors demanding broad short statutes of limitations and restrictively policy solutions to address workplace harassment, too interpreted legal standards; many reform efforts remain narrowly focused on sexual • promote transparency and accountability, harassment, undercutting protections for women of including by limiting the use of abusive NDAs color, immigrants, people with disabilities, and others and forced arbitration and requiring companies who experience harassment based on multiple identities. bidding on federal contracts to report any history of workers’ rights violations; ME TOO WORKPLACE POLICY REFORMS MUST • and require and fund efforts to prevent workplace BE FURTHER STRENGTHENED AND EXPANDED harassment and discrimination, including by requiring employers to adopt a nondiscrimination POLICY CHANGE MUST BE DRIVEN BY AND policy, requiring the EEOC to establish workplace CENTERED ON THOSE MOST HARMED BY training requirements and provide a model HARASSMENT. Workers and survivors should be shaping climate survey to employers, and ensuring that policy solutions to harassment. Their engagement will tipped workers are entitled to the same help ensure these policies actually meet the needs of minimum wage as all other workers. those who experience sexual violence and other forms of harassment. In particular, policy change efforts should include and center workers in low-wage jobs; women of color; queer, transgender, intersex, and gender non- binary folks; immigrant workers; people with disabilities; and those who are currently or formerly incarcerated.

PAGE 4 Lawmakers must craft solutions that don’t just benefit those “The extension of anti-harassment protections in with the most privilege, financial resources, and access to New York to cover protected characteristics like legal systems, but take into account how workplace power race, ethnicity, and gender identity is an important dynamics, workers’ financial insecurity or immigration status, victory. Through our helpline and worker focus groups, and employers’ and courts’ stereotyped assumptions about we regularly hear from women, including domestic who is credible and who is not can make it impossible to workers and house cleaners, who are subjected to report harassment, much less settle or file a claim. Policy intersectional forms of harassment. While it often reforms should also focus on preventing harm before it ever relates to their gender, it also overlaps with their happens, rather than only after it occurs, and on shifting ethnicity and the languages they speak. By eliminating workplace structures to build worker power, like raising the special carve-outs and streamlining protections, we minimum wage, and ensuring equal pay, paid leave, and fair get closer to addressing discrimination as it actually work schedules. occurs and ensuring that the law is more inclusive and accessible for all.”

WORKPLACE HARASSMENT REFORMS SHOULD NOT BE - SEHER KHAWAJA, LEGAL MOMENTUM, NEW YORK LIMITED TO SEXUAL HARASSMENT. Like sexual harassment, workplace discrimination and harassment based on race, “It isn’t just white women who are getting sexually disability, color, religion, age, or national origin all undermine harassed, so it is an artificial construct to not include workers’ equality, safety, and dignity—and these forms of race, national origin, religion, etcetera [when harassment and discrimination often intersect in working strengthening anti-harassment protections]. Looking people’s actual experiences. The sexual harassment a Black forward, we have a moment of opportunity that should woman experiences, for example, may include racial slurs and be grasped to fill in these gaps on a national and state- reflect racial hostility. Indeed, Equal Employment Opportunity wide basis.” Commission (EEOC) charge data indicate that women of - WENDY MUSELL, LAW OFFICES OF WENDY MUSELL; LEVY VINICK color—and Black women in particular—are disproportionately likely to experience sexual harassment at work, highlighting BURRELL HYAMS LLP, CALIFORNIA how race and sexual harassment can be intertwined.7 Legislation that focuses exclusively on sexual harassment ME TOO REFORMS SHOULD NOT JUST FOCUS ON THE has the odd and impractical result of providing a worker who WORKPLACE. Sexual harassment doesn’t just happen in the experiences multiple, intersecting violations with only partial workplace, and it doesn’t just affect adults. Too many students protection. Lawmakers should craft solutions that recognize experience sexual violence and other forms of harassment in these intersections. elementary and secondary schools and in college. And just as in the workplace, often the sexual harassment students experience is entwined with other forms of harassment “I don’t think you can talk about the history of and discrimination. To prevent harassment at work, we sexual harassment without talking about race. The must start by addressing it in schools, as the treatment and early history of this country thrived off the sexual behavior students experience from their peers, teachers, harassment and assault of Black women. Slavery and administrators ultimately shapes workplace norms about was dependent on the rape of Black women, who gender, race, respect, and accountability. States can help became pregnant and gave birth to children who schools prevent harassment and assault by promoting the use would become slaves. When slavery was no longer of regular school climate surveys, requiring age-appropriate legal, Black women’s sexuality was then vilified and consent and healthy relationship education in K-12, requiring even criminalized. Current sexual harassment laws educators to receive ongoing training to recognize implicit reflect that complicated history. The law needs to biases and implement trauma-informed approaches in the recognize that race and sex are inevitably intertwined. classroom, restricting schools’ use of strict and gendered Attempting to ask plaintiffs/victims to separate race dress codes, requiring amnesty policies for students who may and sex is requesting an impossible feat.” fear reporting harassment or an assault when doing so would - PHILLIS RAMBSY, RAMBSY LAW AND SPIGGLE LAW FIRM, TENNESSEE, reveal they violated a student code, and ensuring harassment KENTUCKY, AND D.C., MARYLAND, VIRGINIA investigations and disciplinary hearings are fair and equitable for both those alleging harassment and those who are the subject of complaints, including Black and brown students, LGBTQ students, and students with disabilities.

PAGE 5 #20STATESBY2020 ADVANCES

NEW YORK expanded upon its 2018 legislation by passing ENSURING ALL legislation to ensure subcontractors, vendors, consultants, and others providing contracted services are protected WORKING PEOPLE not just from sexual harassment, but from all forms of ARE COVERED discrimination in the workplace.12 2018 BY HARASSMENT DELAWARE enacted legislation to expand employees covered by its sexual harassment protections to include state PROTECTIONS employees, unpaid interns, applicants, joint employees, and apprentices.13 PROTECTING MORE WORKERS: Legal protections against harassment extend only to “employees” in most states and NEW YORK enacted legislation to protect contractors, under federal law, leaving many people unprotected. States subcontractors, vendors, consultants, and others providing have been working to extend protections against harassment contracted services from sexual harassment in the and discrimination to independent contractors, interns, and workplace.14 volunteers. VERMONT enacted legislation to prohibit sexual harassment 2020 of all people engaged to perform work or services, expanding SOUTH DAKOTA enacted legislation extending protections protections against harassment to independent contractors, against workplace discrimination to interns.9 volunteers, and interns.15

2019 “The expansion of New York’s law to cover ILLINOIS enacted legislation to extend protections against all independent contractors and those who work for forms of harassment to contractors, consultants, and other smaller employers has been critical. It has made individuals who are contracted to directly perform services for it possible to assist more women who come to us the employer.10 through our helpline. Prior to this amendment, we saw too many vulnerable women falling through MARYLAND enacted legislation to extend discrimination and the cracks—women who equally deserved anti- harassment protections to independent contractors and the discrimination protections yet who were arbitrarily personal staff of elected officers.11 excluded based on their employment situation.”

- SEHER KHAWAJA, LEGAL MOMENTUM, NEW YORK

PAGE 6 COVERING MORE EMPLOYERS. In many states, harassment MARYLAND enacted legislation to extend protections from laws do not cover smaller employers, and federal law does all forms of harassment to all employers, regardless of the not reach employers with fewer than 15 employees. Since employer’s size.17 October 2017, states have been working to extend anti- harassment protections to all employers, regardless of size. NEW YORK enacted legislation to extend protections against discrimination to all employers, regardless of the employer’s 2019 size. Previously, New York had only extended anti-sexual ILLINOIS enacted legislation extending protections against harassment protections to all employers regardless of size.18 discrimination to all employers, regardless of size. Previously, Illinois’ workplace anti-discrimination law covered employers 2018 of all sizes for sexual harassment, pregnancy, and disability NEW YORK CITY enacted legislation to amend its Human discrimination claims, but all other antidiscrimination Rights Law to extend gender-based anti-harassment protections extended only to employers with 15 or more protections to all employers, regardless of the number employees.16 of employees.19

employers to register with the state and provide biennial in- ¡YA BASTA! COALITION: ENDING person sexual harassment prevention training with worker SEXUAL VIOLENCE AGAINST input, or risk losing their ability to operate in California. JANITORS Workers testified in support of the bill, organized rallies across the state, put up billboards, and participated in a hunger strike in front of the state capitol. In September The ¡Ya Basta! movement developed in response to a 2016, the Governor signed the legislation into law. 2015 documentary, Rape on the Night Shift, that brought Unfortunately, it soon became clear that more was needed into public consciousness what too many janitorial staff to ensure that trainings were trauma-informed, culturally- already knew: industry conditions, including isolated aware, industry-specific, and effective. The workers got work environments and language barriers, made these back to work: they organized to push for legislation that workers – many of whom are immigrant women – would strengthen the training requirements by requiring especially vulnerable to abuse. that trainings be conducted through a peer-to-peer, or promotoras, education model. In September 2018, 100 The documentary brought these issues to the attention janitors marched 100 miles to Sacramento to pressure the of the Service Employees International Union-United Governor to sign AB 2079, which would require employers Service Workers West (SEIU-USWW), which represents to conduct the trainings through peer education.21 janitors in California. The union surveyed its members and found that approximately half had been sexually Although Governor Brown vetoed the legislation that year, harassed or assaulted at work.20 Janitorial workers the workers did not relent. They continued to pressure with SEIU-USWW who identify as survivors formed the the government to act and the following year, Governor worker-led ¡Ya Basta! Coalition, composed of an array Brown signed the Janitor Survivor Empowerment Act (AB of labor and survivor advocacy organizations, including 547) into law.22 The new legislation requires the state to Worksafe, UC Berkeley’s Labor and Occupational Health curate, with the input of a training advisory committee, a Program (LOHP), Equal Rights Advocates, Futures list of qualified organizations and peer trainers to provide Without Violence, and the California Coalition Against the required anti-sexual harassment training. The training Sexual Assault. advisory committee is required to include representatives from a collective bargaining agent that represents janitorial Workers from the ¡Ya Basta! Coalition and Immigrant workers and sexual assault victim advocacy groups. Women Rising – a movement of janitors and allies Employers are also required to submit a report confirming mobilized by SEIU-USWW – organized to push for training completion to the state. legislation (AB 1978) requiring janitorial industry

PAGE 7 RESTORING WORKER POWER 2019 AND INCREASING ILLINOIS enacted legislation to render void any contract provision that would, as a unilateral condition of employment EMPLOYER or continued employment, prevent employees or prospective employees from disclosing truthful information about TRANSPARENCY AND discrimination, harassment, or retaliation. However, these contract provisions are allowed when they are a mutual ACCOUNTABILITY condition of employment negotiated in good faith and the agreement is in writing; demonstrates actual, knowing, LIMITING NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENTS (NDAS). NDAs and bargained-for consideration from both parties; and can silence individuals who have experienced harassment acknowledges the employee’s right to report allegations to and empower employers to hide ongoing harassment, the appropriate government agency or official, participate in rather than undertake the changes needed to end it. Some agency proceedings, make truthful statements required by employers require employees to enter into NDAs when law, and request and receive legal advice. they start a job that prevent them from speaking up about harassment or discrimination. Other times, NDAs are The legislation also prohibits an employer from unilaterally imposed as part of a settlement of a claim. States have been imposing such an NDA in a settlement or termination working to limit employer power to impose NDAs in both agreement, unless including such a provision is the contexts while still supporting survivors who may want an documented preference of the employee and is mutually assurance of confidentiality. The effectiveness of states’ beneficial to both parties; the employer notifies the employee different policy approaches remains to be seen, but in of their right to have an attorney review the settlement California, at least, several employee rights attorneys report or termination agreement; there is valid, bargained for initial positive impacts. consideration in exchange for the confidentiality; the provision does not waive any future claims of harassment, 2020 discrimination, or retaliation; and the employee is given 21 HAWAI’I enacted legislation prohibiting employers from days to consider the agreement and seven days to revoke the requiring employees, as a condition of employment, to enter agreement.25 into NDAs preventing them from disclosing or discussing sexual harassment or assault occurring in the workplace LOUISIANA enacted legislation prohibiting settlements of or at work-related events. It also prevents employers from workplace sexual harassment or sexual assault claims against retaliating against employees for reporting or discussing the state that use public funds from containing an NDA sexual harassment or assault.23 preventing the claimant from disclosing the underlying facts and terms of the claims.26 NEW MEXICO enacted legislation prohibiting private employers from requiring employees to sign an NDA in NEVADA enacted legislation to render void and unenforceable settlement agreements related to sexual harassment, provisions in settlement agreements that prevent a party discrimination, or retaliation or from preventing employees from disclosing factual information relating to a civil from disclosing sexual harassment, discrimination, or or administrative action for a felony sexual offense, sex retaliation occurring in the workplace or at a work-related discrimination by an employer or a landlord, or retaliation event. The legislation does allow for confidentiality about by an employer or landlord for reporting sex discrimination. the amount of the settlement or, at the employee’s request, The law also prohibits courts from entering an order that facts that could lead to the identification of the employee or would prevent disclosure of this information. The amount of factual information related to the underlying claim. No such a settlement agreement may still be kept confidential and confidentiality provisions, however, can preclude employees claimants can request a confidentiality provision to protect from testifying in judicial, administrative, or other proceedings their identity, unless a government agency or public official is pursuant to a valid subpoena or legal order.24 a party to the settlement agreement.27

PAGE 8 NEW JERSEY enacted legislation to make NDAs in relating to discrimination, harassment, or sexual assault only if employment contracts or settlement agreements that prevent the employee claiming to be discriminated against requests it the disclosure of details relating to a claim of discrimination, and is given seven days to revoke the agreement.31 retaliation, or harassment unenforceable against employees. If the employee publicly reveals sufficient information to Oregon also enacted legislation prohibiting candidates, identify the employer, the employee will not be able to political committees of campaigns, and public office holders enforce the employer’s nondisclosure obligations. Every from using campaign funds and public funds to make settlement agreement must include a notice specifying that payments in connection with a nondisclosure agreement although the parties may have agreed to keep the settlement relating to workplace discrimination, including harassment and underlying facts confidential, such a provision in an and sexual assault.32 agreement is unenforceable against the employer if the employee publicly reveals sufficient details of the claim so that TENNESSEE enacted legislation to make void and the employer is reasonably identifiable. The legislation also unenforceable any provision in a settlement agreement prohibits retaliation against an employee who refuses to enter entered into by a governmental entity that prohibits the into an agreement with an unenforceable provision.28 parties from disclosing the details of the claim or the identities of people related to the claim. However, victims of sexual NEW YORK enacted legislation to render void and harassment, sexual assault, and other offenses, including unenforceable any provision in an agreement between sexual exploitation and domestic abuse, retain the ability to an employer and an employee or potential employee that keep their identities confidential.33 prevents the disclosure of factual information related to discrimination, unless the provision provides notice that VIRGINIA enacted legislation to prohibit employers from it does not prohibit the employee from speaking with requiring an employee or prospective employee to sign, as a law enforcement, the Equal Employment Opportunity condition of employment, a nondisclosure or confidentiality Commission, a state division or local commission on human agreement that has the purpose or effect of concealing the 34 rights, or an attorney.29 details relating to sexual assault.

New York also enacted legislation to extend its 2018 law 2018 limiting NDAs in sexual harassment settlement agreements ARIZONA enacted legislation to allow an individual who is to more broadly limit NDAs in settlements relating to all bound by an NDA to break the NDA if asked about criminal sex discrimination claims. This legislation also added additional offenses by law enforcement or during a criminal proceeding. protections for complainants choosing to enter into an NDA, The legislation also prohibits public officials from using public including requiring the provision be written in plain English funds to enter into a settlement with an NDA related to sexual 35 and in the primary language of the employee and providing assault or sexual harassment. that the provision is void if it prevents the employee from participating in an agency’s investigation or from disclosing CALIFORNIA enacted legislation to prohibit employers from facts necessary to receive public benefits.30 requiring an employee to sign, as a condition of employment or continued employment, or in exchange for a raise or a OREGON enacted legislation to prohibit employers from bonus, a release of a claim or a right, a nondisparagement requiring an employee or prospective employee as a agreement, or other document that prevents the employee condition of employment, continued employment, promotion, from disclosing information about unlawful acts in the compensation, or the receipt of benefits to enter into an workplace, including sexual harassment. The law clarifies agreement preventing the disclosure of discrimination that these provisions do not apply to NDAs or releases in (including harassment) or sexual assault that occurred in the settlement agreements that are voluntary, deliberate, and workplace, at a work-related event, or between an employer informed, and provide consideration of value to the employee, and an employee off the employment premises. An employer and where the employee was given notice and opportunity to 36 may enter into a settlement, separation, or severance retain an attorney or was represented by an attorney. agreement with a nondisclosure or a nondisparagment provision preventing the disclosure of factual information

PAGE 9 California also enacted legislation to prohibit confidentiality NEW YORK enacted legislation to prohibit employers from provisions in settlement agreements that prevent the using NDAs in settlement agreements or other resolutions disclosure of factual information related to claims of sexual of a claim that prevent the disclosure of the underlying facts assault, sexual harassment, or other forms of sex-based and circumstances of sexual harassment claims, unless the workplace harassment, discrimination, and retaliation filed condition of confidentiality is the complainant’s preference. in a civil or administrative action. Claimants can request The complainant must be given 21 days to consider the a confidentiality provision to protect their identity, unless provision and seven days to revoke the agreement.43 a government agency or public official is a party to the settlement agreement. This prohibition does not apply to “California’s new law limiting the confidentiality provisions regarding the amount paid under a use of NDAs in settlements “has settlement agreement.37 really allowed people to step into MARYLAND enacted legislation to make unlawful NDAs and their own power and feel their other waivers of substantive and procedural rights related own voice and make that choice to sexual harassment or retaliation claims in an employment themselves, which has been hugely contract or policy. The law also protects employees from impactful in regaining some of retaliation for refusing to enter into such an agreement.38 what was stolen by the harasser.”

TENNESSEE enacted legislation to make it unlawful to require - BARBARA FIGARI, THE FIGARI LAW FIRM, CALIFORNIA an employee or prospective employee, as a condition of employment, to execute or renew an NDA regarding sexual PROHIBITING NO-REHIRE PROVISIONS. No-rehire harassment. Employees covered by an NDA cannot be fired as provisions in settlement agreements bar employees from retaliation for breaking the NDA.39 ever working for their employer again. Such provisions may impact the individual’s ability to be employed and VERMONT enacted legislation to prohibit employers disincentivize others from coming forward when they from requiring any employee or prospective employee, experience harassment. To address this problem, states are as a condition of employment, to sign an agreement that limiting the use of no-rehire provisions. prevents the individual from opposing, disclosing, reporting, or participating in a sexual harassment investigation. The 2019 legislation also requires a settlement agreement relating to CALIFORNIA enacted legislation to prohibit no-rehire sexual harassment explicitly state that it does not prohibit provisions in agreements to settle employment disputes the claimant from: filing a complaint with any state or federal that prevent an employee who has filed a claim against agency; participating in an investigation by a state or federal the employer from working again for the employer, or any agency; testifying or complying with discovery requests in parent company, subsidiary, division, affiliate, or contractor a proceeding related to a claim of sexual harassment; or of the employer. The new law does not prohibit, however, engaging in concerted activities with other employees under the employer from including a no-rehire provision in a state or federal labor relations laws. The agreement must also settlement with an employee if the employer has made a state that it does not waive any rights or claims that may arise good faith determination that the employee engaged in sexual after the settlement is executed.40 harassment or sexual assault.44

WASHINGTON enacted legislation to prohibit employers OREGON enacted legislation to prohibit no-rehire provisions from requiring an employee, as a condition of employment, in agreements resolving claims of discrimination (including to sign an NDA, waiver, or other document that prevents harassment) or sexual assault, unless the employee requests the employee from disclosing sexual harassment or assault it and is given seven days after signing to revoke the occurring in the workplace, at work-related events, or agreement. The new law does not prohibit, however, the between employees, or an employer and an employee, off the employer from including a no-rehire provision in a settlement employment premises.41 Washington also enacted a separate with an employee if the employer has made a good faith law providing that NDAs cannot be used to limit a person from determination that the employee engaged in discrimination producing evidence or testimony related to past instances (including harassment) or sexual assault.45 of sexual harassment or sexual assault by a party to a civil action.42

PAGE 10 2018 enjoined California from enforcing this law on the basis that it VERMONT enacted legislation to prohibit no-rehire provisions is preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act. That decision has in sexual harassment settlements that prevent an employee been appealed to the 9th Circuit.48 from working again for the employer, or any parent company, subsidiary, division, or affiliate of the employer.46 ILLINOIS enacted legislation to render void any provision that requires, as a condition of employment or continued employment, an employee or prospective employee waive, arbitrate, or diminish any claim of discrimination, harassment, “The prohibition on no rehire or retaliation, unless the agreement is in writing; demonstrates actual, knowing, and bargained-for consideration from both clauses in settlements “has been parties; and acknowledges the employee’s right to report so important. It was awful to have allegations to the appropriate government agency or official, clients sign these because they participate in agency proceedings, make truthful statements could basically be locked out of required by law, and request and receive legal advice.49 an entire industry. It has been NEW JERSEY enacted legislation to make unenforceable very helpful to have really clear provisions in employment contracts that waive any substantive guidance on no-rehire clauses or procedural right or remedy relating to discrimination, because it was so bad for workers retaliation, or harassment claims. The legislation also in low-wage jobs and so potentially specifically provides that no right or remedy under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination or any other statute or retaliatory.” case law can be prospectively waived. Retaliation against an -ELIZABETH KRISTEN, LEGAL AID AT WORK, CALIFORNIA employee who refuses to enter into an employment contract with an unenforceable provision is prohibited.50 Note: this law is currently being challenged in federal court as preempted by STOPPING FORCED ARBITRATION. Many employers compel the Federal Arbitration Act.51 their employees to waive their right to go to court to enforce their rights to be free from harassment and other forms of NEW YORK enacted legislation to extend its 2018 prohibition 52 discrimination. They require employees instead to arbitrate on forced arbitration to all discrimination claims. Note: This any such disputes. Forced arbitration provisions funnel law has been challenged in court with federal district courts harassment claims into often secret proceedings where finding it preempted by the Federal Arbitration Act and a state 53 the deck is stacked against employees and can prevent court finding that it was not preempted. employees from coming together as a group to enforce their rights. While federal law limits states’ ability to legislate in 2018 this area, some states are working to limit employers’ ability MARYLAND enacted legislation to render void, except as to force their employees into arbitration. Many of these prohibited by federal law, any provision in an employment provisions are being challenged by employers in the courts. contract, policy, or agreement that waives any substantive or procedural right or remedy related to a future claim of sexual 2019 harassment or retaliation for reporting sexual harassment.54 CALIFORNIA enacted legislation providing that applicants or employees cannot be forced to waive any right, forum, or NEW YORK enacted legislation to prohibit mandatory procedure for a violation of any provision of the California arbitration to resolve allegations or claims of sexual 55 Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA) or other specific harassment. Note: This law has been challenged in court statutes governing employment. The law prohibits employers with federal district courts finding it preempted by the Federal from threatening, retaliating or discriminating against, or Arbitration Act and a state court in finding that it was not 56 terminating any applicant or employee for refusing to consent preempted. to waiving any right, forum, or procedure for a violation of any provision of the FEHA.47 Note: In 2020 a federal district court

PAGE 11 VERMONT enacted legislation to prohibit employers, except 2019 as otherwise permitted by state or federal law, from requiring TEXAS enacted legislation providing that charitable any employee or prospective employee to sign an agreement organizations, or such an organization’s employee, volunteer, or waiver as a condition of employment that waives a or independent contractor, cannot be held liable for substantive or procedural right or remedy available to the disclosing to a current or prospective employer, in good faith, employee with respect to a sexual harassment claim.57 information reasonably believed to be true about a former employee, volunteer, or independent contractor engaging in WASHINGTON enacted legislation to make void and sexual harassment, assault, abuse, trafficking, or misconduct.62 unenforceable any provisions requiring an employee to waive their right to publicly pursue a cause of action, or to 2018 publicly file a complaint with the appropriate state or federal CALIFORNIA enacted legislation amending their “anti-SLAPP” agencies, relating to any cause of action arising under state or law to include among communications that cannot be subject federal anti-discrimination laws, as well as any provision that to a defamation lawsuit complaints of sexual harassment requires an employee to resolve claims of discrimination in a made by an employee, without malice, to an employer based confidential dispute resolution process.58 on credible evidence as well as communications between the employer and interested persons regarding a complaint of PROTECTING THOSE WHO SPEAK UP FROM DEFAMATION sexual harassment. The legislation also authorizes an employer LAWSUITS. When survivors of workplace harassment and to answer, without malice, whether the employer would rehire assault speak up, they are often not believed and face a former employee and whether a decision to not rehire is retaliation. Increasingly, defamation lawsuits are being based on the employer’s determination that the employee weaponized by sexual harassers as another retaliatory engaged in sexual harassment.63 tactic to silence survivors and others who speak up about harassment. Many states have “anti-SLAPP” (anti-Strategic TRANSPARENCY ABOUT SEXUAL HARASSMENT CLAIMS. Lawsuit Against Public Participation) laws to protect When employers resolve harassment claims out of public individuals who are “slapped” with a meritless defamation view, the lack of transparency can prevent accountability for lawsuit seeking to silence their exercise of free speech and broader reform. To remedy this, several jurisdictions have petition rights regarding matters of public interest. In the last passed laws requiring the reporting or inspection of claims, few years, states have strengthened their anti-SLAPP and complaints, investigations, resolutions, and/or settlements related laws to provide greater protection to those who speak involving workplace harassment. up about sexual harassment and assault. 2019 2020 ILLINOIS enacted legislation to require every employer NEW YORK passed legislation, currently awaiting signature by to disclose to the Department of Human Rights the total the governor, strengthening its “anti-SLAPP” law by expanding number of adverse judgements or rulings regarding sexual the definition of “public interest” to cover “any subject harassment or discrimination against it during the preceding other than a purely private matter” and requiring an award year; whether any relief was ordered against the employer; of attorneys’ fees and costs for an individual who defeats a and the number of rulings or judgements broken down by SLAPP lawsuit.59 The bill sponsor and advocates spoke of this protected characteristic. This information will be published legislation as protecting those who speak out against sexual in an annual report available to the public, but the names of harassment, abuse, and assault from being “slapped” with individual employers will not be disclosed. If the Department is defamation lawsuits.60 investigating a charge of harassment or discrimination, it may request the employer provide the total number of settlements LOUISIANA enacted legislation providing that non-profit from the preceding five years relating to harassment or organizations cannot be held liable for disclosing to a discrimination. Employers may not report the name of any prospective employer, in good faith, information about a victims of harassment or discrimination as part of these former employee, volunteer, or independent contractor disclosures. These requirements remain in effect through engaging in sexual harassment, assault, abuse, trafficking, or January 1, 2030.64 misconduct.61

PAGE 12 2018 resolved, and pending in an annual report to the state Equal ILLINOIS enacted legislation to require reporting of Employment Opportunity Coordinator and the Maryland discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment, and retaliation Commission on Civil Rights.69 claims involving executive branch employees, vendors and others doing business with state agencies in the executive NEW YORK CITY enacted legislation to require all city branch, board members and employees of the Regional agencies, as well as the offices of the Mayor, Borough Transit Boards, and all vendors and others doing business Presidents, Comptroller, and Public Advocate, to annually with the Regional Transit Boards. The reports must be made report on complaints of workplace sexual harassment to publicly available on each office’s website.65 the Department of Citywide Administrative Services. The Department is required to report the number of complaints Illinois also enacted legislation requiring local governments, filed with each agency; the number resolved; the number school districts, community colleges, and other local substantiated and not substantiated; and the number taxing bodies to report whenever they approve a severance withdrawn by the complainant before a final determination. agreement with an employee or contractor because the Information from agencies with 10 employees or less will be employee or contractor was found to have engaged in sexual aggregated together. This information will be reported to the harassment or discrimination. These reports must be made Mayor, the Council and the Commission on Human Rights, available on the internet and to the local press within 72 which will post it on its website.70 hours.66 LIMITING THE USE OF PUBLIC FUNDS IN SETTLEMENTS. LOUISIANA enacted a law requiring each state agency to When elected officials make taxpayers foot the bill for their make available to the public every year the number of sexual harassment, they can avoid real accountability. Like Congress harassment complaints received by the agency, as well as the did in its 2018 reforms to the Congressional Accountability number of complaints which resulted in a finding that sexual Act, several states have been changing their laws to prohibit harassment occurred, the number which resulted in discipline elected officials and candidates from using public funds to or corrective action, and the amount of time it took to resolve pay for sexual harassment judgements or settlements. each complaint.67 2019 MARYLAND enacted legislation to require employers with 50 CALIFORNIA enacted legislation prohibiting the use of or more employees to complete a survey from the Maryland campaign legal defense funds and campaign funds to pay Commission on Civil Rights on the number of settlements or reimburse a candidate or elected officer for a penalty, made by or on behalf of the employer after an allegation of judgment, or settlement related to a claim of sexual assault, sexual harassment by an employee; the number of times the sexual abuse, or sexual harassment.71 employer has paid a settlement to resolve a sexual harassment allegation against the same employee over the past 10 LOUISIANA enacted legislation making state employees years of employment; and the number of sexual harassment and elected officials found to have engaged in sexual settlements that included a provision requiring both parties to harassment responsible for all or a portion of the amount of keep the terms of the settlement confidential. The aggregate the settlement or judgment. The amount a state employee number of responses from employers for each category of shall be responsible for depends on several factors including information will be posted on the Maryland Commission their ability to pay; whether they were performing their official on Civil Rights’ website. The number of times a specific duties at the time the harassment occurred; the severity of the employer paid a settlement to resolve a sexual harassment harassment; and the stage of litigation.72 allegation against the same employee over the past 10 years of employment will be retained for public inspection upon 2018 request. Employers are required to submit these surveys by NEW YORK enacted legislation requiring state government July 1, 2020, and July 1, 2022.68 officials and employees who have a judgment against them for sexual harassment to personally reimburse the state within 90 Another new law requires each unit of the executive branch days for any payment the state made to the plaintiff.73 of the state government to submit information about its sexual harassment policies and prevention training and a summary of sexual harassment complaints filed, investigated,

PAGE 13 FORMER NEW YORK coalition of civil rights organizations, women’s rights and LEGISLATIVE STAFFERS BRING girls’ rights advocacy groups, transgender rights advocates, ABOUT SWEEPING STATEWIDE and workers’ rights litigators. From that organizing, the REFORM Working Group published public policy recommendations for protecting New York employees—both public and private—from harassment. The Working Group also called for a public hearing to provide stakeholders, especially In 2018, seven former New York State legislative survivors, an opportunity to utilize the most powerful tool of 77 employees who experienced, witnessed, or reported all to push for change – their lived experiences. sexual harassment while working in the legislature came Their efforts were successful. On February 13, 2019, the together to demand change. Emboldened by #MeToo, New York legislature held its first joint legislative public their passions for public service, and their desire to no hearing on sexual harassment in over 27 years. Dozens of longer remain silent, they formed the Sexual Harassment witnesses signed up to testify, including the Working Group, Working Group.74 and the hearing lasted 11 hours.78 Members of the Working In March 2018, the Working Group issued a press Group recall the power of being able to confront the release urging the legislature and Governor to conduct legislature with their vulnerability and the trauma they had a transparent review of the state’s sexual harassment experienced in a public and formal way. While the legislative laws. Unfortunately, the legislature passed reforms process often involves negotiations behind closed doors, without adequate input from survivors and other experts the public hearing created a unique kind of accountability. – reforms that fell short of what was truly needed to Following the hearing, when legislators brought solutions address the broken system that had failed survivors for to the table, advocates and the public eye were watching to too long.75 ensure that proposals were responsive to the powerful lived experiences the survivors had shared in such a public way. New York’s 2018 elections for state Senate seats and an open state attorney general seat provided another This hearing, followed by a second hearing that May, a opportunity for the advocates to leverage. Many lobby day in Albany, press conferences, and a roundtable candidates were eager to demonstrate their support for discussion of the proposed reforms with legislators women. The Working Group ensured that harassment was organized by the Working Group and other advocates, led part of the discussion by sending questions about the to the passage in August 2019 of a suite of groundbreaking issue to the attorney general debate moderators.76 reforms to prevent and respond to discrimination in the workplace. These reforms are detailed in this report. The Working Group held group strategy sessions, conducted research, and brought together a broad

PAGE 14 “Extending California’s statute of EXPANDING limitations has been “extremely ACCESS helpful for low-wage workers, who TO JUSTICE . . . often need to make very difficult decisions: how you pay rent, put EXTENDING STATUTES OF LIMITATIONS. Short statutes food on the table, versus making a of limitations can hamper the ability of individuals to bring complaint. Having the additional harassment complaints, especially given the trauma of assault and other forms of harassment, which can impact the time to stabilize their economic ability of individuals to take prompt legal action. situations before they proceed is

2019 very important, and I think is one of CALIFORNIA enacted legislation to extend from one to the greatest positive moves for low- three years the statute of limitations for filing employment – discrimination complaints with the Department of Fair income survivors of harassment.” Employment and Housing.79 WENDY MUSELL, LAW OFFICES OF WENDY MUSELL; LEVY VINICK BURRELL HYAMS LLP, CALIFORNIA CONNECTICUT enacted legislation to allow employees who have been subjected to discrimination, including harassment, ESTABLISHING DISCRIMINATION AND HARASSMENT 300 days to submit a complaint to the Connecticut HELPLINES. Survivors and bystanders often do not speak up Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities where about workplace harassment because they fear retaliation previously they had only 180 days.80 for reporting and/or it is unclear to whom they should report and what their options are. Workers need multiple, trusted MARYLAND enacted legislation to extend the statute of avenues for reporting, including anonymously. Confidential limitations for filing workplace harassment claims with the hotlines or helplines that are independent of an employer can Commission on Human Relations from six months to two play an important role in increasing reporting and stopping years, and from two years to three years for filing workplace harassment. harassment claims in court.81

2020 NEW YORK enacted legislation to extend the statute of NEW JERSEY enacted legislation requiring the Civil Service limitations for filing workplace sexual harassment complaints Commission—an independent body that hears and rules on with the Division of Human Rights from one to three years.82 appeals filed by civil service employees and candidates—to OREGON enacted legislation to give employees who have set up a confidential hotline for state employees to report experienced discrimination (including harassment) five years, incidents of workplace harassment and discrimination, and instead of one, to file a complaint with the Bureau of Labor to receive information about relevant laws, policies, and and Industries or a civil suit.83 procedures, as well as referrals for further assistance and counseling, if requested. The Commission is required to 2018 produce an annual report to the public on the number and 85 NEW YORK CITY enacted legislation to extend the statute of types of calls received. limitations for filing claims of gender-based harassment with the New York City Commission on Human Rights from one 2018 year to within three years after the alleged harassing conduct ILLINOIS enacted legislation requiring the Department occurred.84 of Human Rights to establish a sexual harassment and discrimination helpline to which individuals in public and private employment can report, including anonymously, and

PAGE 15 receive help with finding resources, including counseling REVISING THE “SEVERE OR PERVASIVE” LIABILITY services, and assistance in filing sexual harassment and STANDARD. The requirement under federal law and most discrimination complaints with the Department or other state laws that harassment be “severe or pervasive” in applicable agencies. The Department must annually report order to establish a hostile work environment claim has the number and type of calls received.86 been interpreted by courts in such an unduly restrictive manner that only the most egregious conduct qualifies. ENSURING RIGHTS TO BE FREE FROM HARASSMENT CAN These interpretations minimize and ignore the impact of BE ENFORCED. Some state laws declare that workplace harassment and severely undermine harassment victims’ discrimination, including harassment, is unlawful, but do not ability to pursue claims, hold employers accountable, and provide a meaningful—or any—mechanism for an employee obtain relief for the harm they have suffered. Two states to enforce their right to a discrimination and harassment- have passed legislation seeking to address and correct free workplace in court. This lack of a meaningful “cause these harmful interpretations. of action” to enforce the law seriously undermines survivors’ ability to pursue justice and hold their employers 2019 accountable as well as employers’ incentive to prevent NEW YORK enacted legislation to explicitly remove the harassment from occurring to begin with. restrictive “severe or pervasive” standard for establishing a hostile work environment claim. Under the new standard, 2020 harassment is an unlawful discriminatory practice when VIRGINIA enacted legislation strengthening its cause of it subjects an individual to inferior terms, conditions, or action for employment discrimination, which previously only privileges of employment because of the individual’s provided relief for a narrow set of employees working for an membership in one or more protected categories. The employer with more than 5 but less than 15 employees and law provides that an employee need not compare their only when an employee was discriminatorily discharged. treatment to that of another employee in order to state a Virginia’s new law provides a cause of action for all types of claim. Employers can assert a defense to such a claim if discrimination, not just discrimination ending in discharge, they can show that the harassing conduct did not rise above and protects employees whose workplace has 15 or more what a reasonable person in the same protected class would employees, or 5 or more employees in the case of unlawful consider petty slights or trivial inconveniences.88 discharge. The new law also explicitly prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity.87

“The change to California’s severe or pervasive standard has been especially important for our low-wage worker clients. Being able to tell them that one incident of harassment can be enough to state a claim and that they do not have to show some heightened standard of harm and instead that they need only show “disruption of emotional tranquility” is very meaningful. I have found that for my transgender clients subjected to workplace harassment based on misuse of name and gender pronouns, these two changes make their claims easier to explain to a factfinder and more in line with how my clients experience the harassment – one incident

of misgendering is devastating.” — ELIZABETH KRISTEN, LEGAL AID AT WORK, CALIFORNIA

PAGE 16 2018 their employers are no longer vicariously liable for that CALIFORNIA enacted legislation to clarify the “severe or harassment. The Vance decision is grossly out of touch pervasive standard.” The law states that a single incident of with the realities of the workplace, as supervisors with the harassment is sufficient to create a hostile work environment authority to direct daily work activities can wield a significant if the harassment has unreasonably interfered with the amount of power over their subordinates. Many state courts employee’s work performance or created an intimidating, follow federal law interpretations—and thus the Vance case— hostile or offensive working environment. Moreover, a victim in interpreting their own state anti-harassment laws. Several need not prove that their productivity declined due to the states have been working to expand employer accountability harassment; it is sufficient to prove that the harassment for harassment by lower-level supervisors. made it more difficult to do the job. Additionally, the new law clarifies that a court must consider the totality of 2019 the circumstances in assessing whether a hostile work MARYLAND enacted legislation to make employers liable environment exists and that a discriminatory remark may for harassment by individuals who have the power to make contribute to this environment even if it is not made by a decisions regarding employees’ employment status or by decision maker or in the context of an employment decision. those who direct, supervise, or evaluate employees. An Courts are to apply these standards to all workplaces, employer is also liable if its negligence led to the harassment regardless of whether a particular occupation has been or allowed the harassment to continue.91 historically associated with a higher frequency of sexually related comments and conduct than other occupations.89 2018 DELAWARE enacted legislation to hold employers responsible CLOSING A LOOHPOLE IN EMPLOYER LIABILITY. Under for sexual harassment by supervisors when the sexual federal law and many state laws, employers can avoid liability harassment negatively impacts the employment status of for a supervisor’s harassment of subordinates if the employer an employee. A supervisor includes any individual who is can show that it took steps to prevent and address the empowered by the employer to take an action to change harassment and that the employee did not take advantage the employment status of an employee or who directs an 92 of the employer’s available preventative or corrective employee’s daily work activities. measures, like reporting the harassment to the employer. In REDRESSING HARM TO VICTIMS OF HARASSMENT. practice, this means that employers are able to evade liability Compensatory damages can compensate victims of by showing little more than they provide training or have a harassment for out-of-pocket expenses and emotional harm policy on the books, regardless of quality or efficacy. States caused by harassment, and punitive damages awarded to have been working to close this judicially created loophole victims punish employers who acted maliciously or recklessly that is blocking harassment victims from obtaining justice. in engaging in harassment. However, compensatory and punitive damages are capped in harassment and other 2019 discrimination cases under federal law and many state laws; NEW YORK enacted legislation to provide that the fact that in some states, they are not available at all. Limiting these an individual did not make a complaint to the employer about damages means that individuals who have experienced harassment does not determine whether the employer is liable egregious sexual harassment may not be fully compensated for the harassment.90 for their injuries, and employers are less incentivized to ENSURING EMPLOYER LIABILITY FOR SUPERVISOR prevent harassment before it happens. HARASSMENT. The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in 2020 Vance v. Ball State University limited victims’ ability to VIRGINIA enacted legislation allowing victims of employment obtain redress under federal law when they experience discrimination to recover uncapped compensatory and sexual harassment by low-level supervisors. That case held punitive damages to address their injury. The law had that when employees with the authority to direct daily work previously only provided victims up to 12 months of back activities—but not the authority to hire, fire, and take other pay.93 tangible employment action—harass their subordinates,

PAGE 17 2019 reinstated.95 While this legislation increased the relief available CONNECTICUT enacted legislation permitting a court under Nevada law by bringing it into line with the relief to award punitive damages to a victim of employment available under federal law, the damages available under Title discrimination, overturning a Connecticut Supreme VII are themselves in need of reform and the damage caps Court ruling disallowing such damage awards. Uncapped need to be removed. compensatory and punitive damages are now available.94 NEW YORK, which previously provided for uncapped NEVADA enacted legislation allowing victims of employment compensatory damages in discrimination claims, but did not discrimination to be awarded the same remedies as available authorize punitive damages, enacted legislation authorizing under federal law, which includes compensatory and punitive punitive damages, without limitation on the amount, for all damages, capped based on the employer size. Previously employment discrimination actions brought against a private Nevada’s anti-discrimination law had only allowed victims to employer.96 recover two years of back pay and benefits and to be

the “Hands Off Pants On” ordinance, which was passed HOTEL WORKERS DEMAND in 2017 and requires hotels to provide a panic button to PANIC BUTTONS hotel workers assigned to clean or restock guest rooms or restrooms alone and requires hotels to develop a written anti-sexual harassment policy.98 Since #MeToo went viral, several states, including Washington, Illinois, and New Jersey in 2019, have passed legislation requiring hotels to provide employees panic buttons. Illinois’ law also covers Some industries may require unique solutions employees who work in casinos and Washington’s law for addressing sexual harassment and violence also applies to janitors and security guards who work in responsive to the particular nature of their work. For isolated conditions. Illinois’ and Washington’s laws require many years, hotel and hospitality workers across employers to adopt an anti-sexual harassment policy and the country have been organizing and demanding Washington’s law also requires employers to provide anti- that their employers address widespread sexual sex discrimination and harassment training.99 harassment and violence by customers. For example, after finding that 58% of women hotel workers and 77% of women casino workers surveyed had been sexually harassed by a guest,97 workers with UNITE HERE Local 1 in Chicago pushed for the passage of

PAGE 18 training at least every 10 years. The Connecticut Commission PROMOTING on Human Rights and Opportunities is required to create and make available at no cost to employers an online training and PREVENTION education video or other interactive method of training that 102 STRATEGIES fulfills these requirements. ILLINOIS enacted legislation to require the Department While Title VII has been interpreted to provide employers of Human Rights to produce a model sexual harassment with an incentive to adopt sexual harassment policies prevention training program to be made available to and training, it has created a situation where employers employers and to the public online at no cost. The program effectively are able to shield themselves from liability by must include an explanation of sexual harassment; examples having any anti-harassment policy or training, regardless of conduct that qualifies as sexual harassment; a summary of quality or efficacy. Employer anti-harassment training of relevant state and federal provisions and remedies; and policies have been largely ineffective in preventing and a summary of employers’ responsibility in preventing, harassment in the first instance in part because they are not investigating, and correcting sexual harassment. All private mandatory, and because they are focused on compliance employers in the state must use this model or create their with the law, instead of preventing harassment. own program that equals or exceeds the model’s standards. Employers must provide this training at least once a year to REQUIRING ANTI-HARASSMENT TRAINING. Effective all employees. Illinois also amended its sexual harassment training, especially when tailored to the specific workplace training requirement for public employees to expand it to a and workforce, can reduce workplace harassment. Several “harassment and discrimination” prevention training.103 jurisdictions have passed legislation requiring training for employees and in some cases mandating the content. 2018 CALIFORNIA, which previously only required employers with 2020 50 or more employees to provide sexual harassment training NEW JERSEY enacted legislation requiring state employees to supervisory employees once every two years, enacted responsible for managing and investigating complaints of legislation expanding the requirement so that employers harassment and discrimination to receive additional training with five or more employees are now required to provide at every three years conducted by the New Jersey Attorney least two hours of interactive sexual harassment training and General’s Advocacy Institute, or another organization education to all supervisory employees, and at least one hour with expertise in response to and prevention of sexual of such training to all nonsupervisory employees in California violence, in consultation with the New Jersey Coalition within six months of their assumption of a position, by January Against Sexual Assault.100 1, 2021. After January 1, 2021, employers must provide the required training to each employee once every two years.104 VIRGINIA enacted legislation requiring all government California also enacted legislation that authorizes, but does contractors with more than 5 employees and a contract over not require, employers to provide bystander intervention $10,000 to provide annual training on the employer’s sexual training.105 harassment policy to all supervisors and employees.101 DELAWARE enacted legislation to require employers with 50 2019 or more employees to provide interactive sexual harassment CONNECTICUT, which previously only required employers prevention training and education to employees and with 50 or more employees to train supervisory employees, supervisors within one year of beginning employment and enacted legislation to require all employers with three or every two years thereafter. Employers are required to provide more employees to provide sexual harassment training to additional interactive training for supervisors addressing every employee and to require those with fewer than three their specific responsibilities to prevent and correct sexual employees to provide training to supervisory employees. harassment and retaliation.106 Employers must also provide employees with supplemental

PAGE 19 LOUISIANA enacted a law requiring each public employee passed legislation requiring public and/or private employers and elected official to receive a minimum of one hour of to have anti-harassment policies or directing state agencies sexual harassment training each year. Supervisors and to develop model policies for broader use. employees designated to accept or investigate complaints must receive additional training. Each agency must also 2020 maintain public records of each employee and official’s VIRGINIA enacted legislation requiring all government compliance with the training requirement.107 contractors with more than 5 employees and a contract over $10,000 to post their sexual harassment policy in a MARYLAND enacted legislation requiring all state employees conspicuous public place and publish it in the employee to complete at least two hours of in-person or virtual, handbook.113 interactive training on sexual harassment prevention within six months of hire and every two years thereafter. Additional WASHINGTON enacted legislation (SB 6205) requiring training is required for supervisors.108 employers of long-term care workers to develop and disseminate a written policy on how to handle workplace NEW YORK enacted legislation to require New York’s discrimination and abusive conduct, including sexual Department of Labor to develop a model sexual harassment harassment or assault. The policy must be available in English prevention training program, and to require all employers and each of the three languages spoken most by long-term to conduct annual interactive training using either the state care workers and must be reviewed and updated annually. model or a model that meets state standards.109 Among other provisions, employers must also implement plans to prevent and protect employees from discrimination NEW YORK CITY enacted legislation to require employers and abusive conduct to be developed, monitored, and with 15 or more employees to conduct annual anti-sexual updated at least every three years by a workplace safety harassment interactive trainings for all employees, including committee of employee-elected members, employer-selected supervisory and managerial employees. The training must members, and at least one service recipient. include information concerning bystander intervention and the specific responsibilities of supervisory and managerial 2019 employees in addressing and preventing sexual harassment CONNECTICUT enacted legislation to require an employer to and retaliation.110 New York City also now requires all either provide its employees, within three months of their start city agencies, the offices of Mayor, Borough Presidents, date, with a copy of its sexual harassment policy via email, Comptroller, and Public Advocate to conduct annual anti- or to post the policy on their website and provide employees sexual harassment trainings for all employees.111 with a link to the Connecticut Commission on Human Rights and Opportunities’ sexual harassment website.114 VERMONT enacted legislation to allow the state Attorney General or the Human Rights Commission to inspect NEW YORK enacted legislation requiring employers to provide employers for compliance with sexual harassment laws and, employees their sexual harassment prevention policy at the if the Attorney General or Commission deems it necessary, time of hire and at every annual training, in English and in the require an employer, to provide an annual education and employee’s primary language if the commissioner on labor training program to all employees or to conduct an annual, offers model policies in the employee’s primary language. The anonymous climate survey, or both, for a period of up to three legislation also required the Department of Labor to evaluate years.112 the impact of its current model sexual harassment prevention guidance document and sexual harassment prevention policy REQUIRING STRONG ANTI-HARASSMENT POLICIES. every four years and update as needed.115 Anti-harassment policies are merely encouraged, not required, by federal law. As a result, many employers lack OREGON enacted legislation to require all employers to anti-harassment policies, particularly smaller organizations adopt a written policy to reduce and prevent discrimination without the resources to engage legal and human resource (including harassment) and sexual assault. The policy must experts to develop them. In response, several jurisdictions provide, among other things, a process for an employee

PAGE 20 to report discrimination and sexual assault and statements for working people to feel safe enough to speak up about outlining the statute of limitations and the prohibition on workplace abuses. Requiring employers to post or otherwise NDAs. Additionally, the law requires the Bureau of Labor and share with employees information about their rights can help Industry to make model procedures and policies available on employees better assert those rights. its website, which employers may use to establish their own policies.116 Oregon enacted similar requirements for public 2018 employers.117 CALIFORNIA,124 DELAWARE,125 ILLINOIS,126 NEW YORK CITY,127 and VERMONT128 all enacted legislation to require 2018 employers to post or otherwise share with employees ILLINOIS enacted legislation to require companies bidding for information about employees’ rights to be free from sexual state contracts to have a sexual harassment policy.118 harassment.

LOUISIANA enacted a law requiring each state agency to LOUISIANA enacted legislation to require establishments develop and institute a sexual harassment policy that, among that have been licensed by the state to serve or sell alcohol other minimum requirements, contains a clear prohibition to distribute an informational pamphlet to their employees against retaliation and an effective complaint process with information on identifying and responding to sexual that includes taking immediate and appropriate action harassment and assault.129 when a complaint is received and details the process for making a complaint and alternative designees for receiving REQUIRING CLIMATE SURVEYS. A climate survey is a complaints.119 tool used to assess an organization’s culture by soliciting employee knowledge, perceptions, and attitudes on various NEW YORK enacted legislation to require its Department issues. Anonymous climate surveys can help management of Labor to create and publish a model sexual harassment understand the true nature and scope of harassment and prevention guidance document and sexual harassment discrimination in the workplace, inform important issues to prevention policy that employers may utilize in their adoption be included in training, and identify problematic behavior of a sexual harassment prevention policy.120 It also enacted that may be addressed before it leads to formal complaints or legislation to require bidders on state contracts to certify as lawsuits. part of the bidding process that the bidder has implemented a written policy addressing workplace sexual harassment 2018 prevention and provides annual sexual harassment prevention NEW YORK CITY enacted legislation to require all city training to all of its employees. If a bidder is unable to make agencies, as well as the offices of the Mayor, Borough this certification, they must provide a signed statement Presidents, Comptroller, and the Public Advocate, to explaining why.121 conduct climate surveys to assess the general awareness and knowledge of the city’s equal employment opportunity WASHINGTON enacted legislation to establish a state policy, including but not limited to sexual harassment policies women’s commission to address several issues, including and prevention at city agencies. Additionally, the new law best practices for sexual harassment policies, training, requires all New York City agencies and the offices of the and recommendations for state agencies to update their Mayor, Borough Presidents, Comptroller, and Public Advocate policies.122 Additionally, the state equal employment to assess workplace risk factors associated with sexual opportunity commission is required to convene a working harassment.130 group to develop model policies and best practices to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, including training, VERMONT enacted legislation to allow the state Attorney enforcement, and reporting mechanisms.123 General or the Human Rights Commission to inspect employers for compliance with sexual harassment laws and, REQUIRING NOTICE OF EMPLOYEE RIGHTS. No workplace if the Attorney General or Commission deems it necessary, anti-harassment or anti-discrimination law will be truly require an employer, to provide an annual education and effective if working people are unaware of the laws and their training program to all employees or to conduct an annual, protections. The stark power imbalances that often exist anonymous climate survey, or both, for a period of up to three between an employee and the employer can make it difficult years.131

PAGE 21 THE FIGHT FOR JUSTICE AND ACCOUNTABILITY IS FAR FROM OVER

As the Me Too movement has made clear, the laws and systems in place designed to address harassment have been inadequate. While much progress has been made in the last three years, policymakers must continue to strengthen protections and fill gaps in existing law and policy to better protect working people, promote accountability, and prevent harassment.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS We gratefully acknowledge Alejandra Valles with SEIU-USWW for her assistance with “¡YA BASTA! Coalition: Ending sexual violence against janitors” and Erica Vladimer, Rita Pasarell, and the Sexual Harassment Working Group for their assistance with “Former New York legislative staffers bring about sweeping change.” We also acknowledge and thank NWLC Art Director Beth Stover for the report design and NWLC colleagues Stephanie Hernandez, Emily Martin, Marissa Moore, Maria Patrick, Maria Ortiz Pineda, Maya Raghu, Elisabeth Spector, and Arvia Walker for their contributions to this report.

The Center thanks the Women Donors Network, JPB Foundation, Collective Future Fund, Ford Foundation, and W.K. Kellogg Foundation for their support of the Center’s anti-harassment work.

1 #20StatesBy2020 Letter, Nat’l Women’s Law Ctr. (Mar. 5, 2020), https://nwlc.org/resources/20-states-by-2020-letter/. 2 Nat’l Women’s Law Ctr., COVID-19 is Making Women’s Economic Situation Even Worse (Sept. 2020), https://nwlc-ciw49tixgw5lbab.stackpathdns.com/wp-content/ uploads/2020/09/PulsedataFS-1.pdf. 3 See Be Heard In The Workplace Act, S.B. 786, 2019-2020 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (N.C. 2020). 4 Press conference discussing SB 786 - Bringing an End to Harassment by Enhancing Accountability and Rejecting Discrimination (BE HEARD) In the Workplace, https://www.facebook.com/EricaForUS/videos/237829394337503/ (last visited Aug. 19, 2020). 5 Nat’l Women’s Law Ctr., Out of The Shadows: An Analysis of Sexual Harassment Charges Filed By Working Women 16-19 (Aug. 2018), https://nwlc.org/resources/out-of- theshadows-an-analysis-ofsexualharassment-charges-filed-by-working-women. 6 Michigan Republicans just repealed a minimum wage increase during a lame-duck session, Mother Jones, Dec. 4, 2018, https://www.motherjones.com/ politics/2018/12/michigan-republicans-minimum-wage-sick-leave-lame-duck-rick-snyder-gretchen-whitmer/; Fenit Nirappil, D.C. Council overturns wage hike for bartenders, servers — four months after voters approved it, Wash. Post, Oct. 2, 2018, https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/dcpolitics/dc-council-takes-initial- vote-to-overturn-initiative-77-four-months-after-voters-approved-it/2018/10/02/da906320-c651- 11e8-b1ed-1d2d65b86d0c_story.html?utm_term=.a2331738d842. 7 Nat’l Women’s Law Ctr., Out of The Shadows., supra note 5 at 16-19 (Out of the sexual harassment charges filed with the EEOC by women, 56 percent were filed by women of color; yet, women of color only make up 37 percent of women in the workforce). 8 Be Heard In The Workplace Act, S. 1082, 116th Cong. (2019). 9 H.B. 1216, 95th Leg. (S.D. 2020). 10 S.B. 0075, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019). 11 H.B. 679, 2019 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2019). 12 A8421, § 4, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 13 H. Substitute No. 1 for H.B. 360, 149th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Del. 2018). 14 S.B. 7507C, § 296-d, subpart F, 2017-2018 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. 2018). 15 ACT 183, H.707, § 1, 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). 16 H.B. 252, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019). 17 H.B. 679, 2019 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2019). 18 A8421, § 1, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019) (amended by S.B. S6594, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019)). 19 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. No. 657-A (2018). 20 Bernice Yeung, How a Group of Janitors Started a Movement to Stop Sexual Abuse, KQED (Jan. 16, 2018), https://www.kqed.org/news/11642102/how-a-group-of- janitors-started-a-movement-to-stop-sexual-abuse. 21 Building Worker Power: The Ya Basta Center, Workplaces Respond to Domestic & Sexual Violence (Feb. 11, 2019) https://www.workplacesrespond.org/blog/building- worker-power-ya-basta-center/; Sasha Khokha, 100 Janitors March 100 Miles to Stop Rape on the Night Shift, KQED (Sept. 13, 2018) https://www.kqed.org/ news/11692232/100-janitors-march-100-miles-to-stop-rape-on-the-night-shift. 22 Veronika Geronimo, Immigrant Women Sweep Out Sexual Violence at Their Jobs, Revolution English (Sept. 13, 2019) https://revolutionenglish.org/immigrant- women-sweep-out-sexual-violence-at-their-jobs/. 23 H.B. 2054 HD1 SD1, 30th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Haw. 2020). 24 H.B. 21, 2020 Reg. Sess. (N.M. 2020). 25 S.B. 0075, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019) 26 H.B. 197, 2019 Reg. Sess. (La. 2019); see also La. R. § 13:5109.1 (2019).

PAGE 22 27 A.B. 248, 80th Leg. (Nv. 2019). 28 S. 121, § 2, 218th Leg., 2018-2019 Reg. Sess. (Nj. 2019); see also § 10:5-12.8. 29 A8421, § 7, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 30 A8421, § 7, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 31 S.B. 726, 80th Leg., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019); S.B. 479, 80th Leg. Assemb., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019). 32 S.B. 478, 80th Leg. Assemb., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019). 33 H.B. 594, 111th Gen. Ass., Reg. Sess. (Tenn. 2019). 34 H.B. 1820, 2019 Reg. Sess. (Va. 2019); see also VA. CODE ANN. § 40.1-28.01 (2019). 35 H.B. 2020, 53rd Leg., 2nd Reg. Sess. (Ariz. 2018). 36 S.B. 1300, § 4(a), 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018); Id. At § 4(c). 37 S.B. 820, 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018). 38 Disclosing Sexual Harassment In The Workplace Act of 2018, S.B. 1010, § 1, 2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2018). 39 H.B. 2613, 110th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Tenn. 2018). 40 ACT 183, H.707, § 1, 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). 41 S.B. 5996, 65th Leg., 2018 Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2018). 42 S.B. 6068, 65th Leg., 2018 Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2018). 43 N.Y. Civil Practice Law & Rules § 5003-B (McKinney 2018). 44 A.B. 749, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2019). 45 S.B. 726, 80th Leg., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019); S.B. 479, 80th Leg., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019). 46 ACT 183, H.707, § 1(h), 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). 47 A.B. 51, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2019). 48 See Chamber of Commerce of the United States v. Becerra, 438 F.Supp.3d 1078 (E.D. Cal. 2020). 49 S.B. 0075, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019). 50 S. 121, § 1, 218th Leg., 2018-2019 Reg. Sess. (Nj. 2019); see also § 10:5-12.7. 51 See New Jersey Civil Justice Inst. v. Grewal, CV 19-17518, 2020 WL 4188129 (D.N.J. July 21, 2020). 52 A8421, §8, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 53 Latif v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 18cv11528 (DLC), 2019 WL 2610985 (S.D.N.Y. June 26, 2019); Whyte v. WeWork Cos., No. 20-cv-1800 (CM), 2020 WL 3099969 (S.D.N.Y. June 11, 2020); Newton v. LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton Inc., No. 154178/2019, 2020 WL 3961988 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 10, 2020). 54 Disclosing Sexual Harassment In The Workplace Act of 2018, S.B. 1010, § 2, 2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2018). 55 S.B. 7507C § 296-d, subpart B, 2017-2018 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. 2018). 56 Latif v. Morgan Stanley & Co., 18cv11528 (DLC), 2019 WL 2610985 (S.D.N.Y. June 26, 2019); Whyte v. WeWork Cos., No. 20-cv-1800 (CM), 2020 WL 3099969 (S.D.N.Y. June 11, 2020); Newton v. LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton Inc., No. 154178/2019, 2020 WL 3961988 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. July 10, 2020). 57 ACT 183, H.707, § 1(g), 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). 58 S.B. 6313, 65th Leg., 2018 Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2018). 59 S52a, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2020). 60 Brad Hoylman, As Trump Attacks the Free Press, Legislature Passes Senator Hoylman and Assemblywoman Weinstein’s Legislation to Crack Down on Frivolous “SLAPP” Lawsuits Used to Silence Critics (July 22, 2020), https://www.nysenate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/brad-hoylman/trump-attacks-free-press- legislature-passes-senator-hoylman-and. 61 S.B. 439, 2020 Reg. Sess. (La. 2020). 62 H.B. 4345, 86th Leg. (Tx. 2019). 63 A.B. 2770, 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018). 64 S.B. 0075, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019). 65 H.B. 138, 100th Gen. Assemb., 2nd Reg. Sess. (Ill. 2018); see also State Officials and Employees Ethics Act, 5 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 430/20-10(c) (Ill. 2003). 66 H.B. 4242, 100th Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2018). 67 H.B. 524, 2018 Reg. Sess. (La. 2018). 68 Disclosing Sexual Harassment In The Workplace Act of 2018, S.B. 1010, § 2, 2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2018). 69 H.B. 1228, 2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2018). 70 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. No. 653-A (2018). 71 S.B. 71, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2019). 72 S.B. 182, 2019 Reg. Sess. (La. 2019). This legislation also contained several concerning revisions to Louisiana’s law requiring state employers to have an anti- harassment policy, including a requirement that the policy explicitly note that disciplinary actions may be taken against a complainant if it is determined that a claim of sexual harassment was intentionally false. Such language in a workplace anti-harassment policy risks having a serious chilling effect on victims’ willingness to report harassment. 73 S.B. 7507C, § 296-d, subpart C, 2017-2018 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. 2018). 74 Vivian Wang, How 7 Women Helped Put Sexual Harassment on New York’s Agenda, N.Y. Times (Feb. 12, 2019) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/nyregion/ sexual-harassment-ny-legislature.html. 75 Vivian Wang, New York Rewrites Harassment Laws, but Some Say the Change Falls Short, N.Y. Times (Mar. 30, 2018) https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/30/ nyregion/new-york-revised-sexual-harassment-laws.html. 76 Vivian Wang, How 7 Women Helped Put Sexual Harassment on New York’s Agenda, N.Y. Times (Feb. 12, 2019) https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/12/nyregion/ sexual-harassment-ny-legislature.html. 77 Bennett et al., Fixing Albany’s #MeToo Problem: What’s Next? (June 2018) https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b2852b24611a0e9ecdad36c/t/5b28a7490e2e72a7 50b7a32d/1529390922095/Sexual+Harassment+Working+Group_White+Paper.pdf. 78 Biaggi et al., Report on New York State Joint Legislative Hearings on Sexual Harassment 3 (Apr. 2019) https://www.nysenate.gov/sites/default/files/final_sexual_ harassment_hearing_report_1_4.pdf. 79 A.B. 9, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2019). 80 S.B. 3, § 6, 2019 Gen. Assemb. (Conn. 2019). 81 H.B. 679, 2019 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2019). 82 A8421, § 13, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 83 S.B. 726, 80th Leg., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019).

PAGE 23 84 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. No. 663-A (2018). 85 A.B. 5630, 218th Leg., Reg. Sess. (N.J. 2020). 86 H.B. 138, 100th Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2018). 87 S.B. 868, 2020 Reg. Sess. (Va. 2020). 88 A8421, § 13, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 89 S.B. 1300, § 1, Reg. Sess. 2017-2018 (Cal. 2018); see also Cal. Gov’t Code § 12923 (2018). 90 A8421, § 2, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 91 H.B. 679, 2019 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2019). 92 H. Substitute No. 1 for H.B. 360, 149th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Del. 2018). 93 S.B. 868, 2020 Reg. Sess. (Va. 2020). 94 S.B. 3, § 6, 2019 Gen. Assemb. (Conn. 2019). 95 S.B. 177, 80th Leg. (Nv. 2019). 96 A8421, § 5, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 97 Hands Off Pants On: Sexual Harassment in Chicago’s Hospitality Industry (July 2016), https://www.handsoffpantson.org/wp-content/uploads/HandsOffReportWeb. pdf. 98 Learn about the “Hands Off Pants On” Ordinance, https://www.handsoffpantson.org/protecting-and-respecting-women/ (last visited Sept. 21, 2020) 99 S.B. 5258, 66th Leg., Reg. Sess. (Wa. 2019); S.B. 0075, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019); S. 2986, 2018-2019 Reg. Sess. (Nj. 2019) 100 A.B. 5632, 218th Leg., Reg. Sess. (N.J. 2020). 101 H.B. 1228, 2020 Reg. Sess. (Va. 2020). 102 S.B. 3, § 15, 2019 Gen. Assemb. (Conn. 2019). 103 S.B. 0075, 101st Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2019). 104 The California Department of Fair Employment and Housing must develop or obtain two online, interactive training courses on the prevention of sexual harassment in the workplace and make them available on the Department’s website. S.B. 1343, 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018); S.B. 778, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2019). 105 S.B. 1300, § 3, 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018). 106 H. Substitute No. 1 for H.B. 360, 149th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Del. 2018). 107 H.B. 524, 2018 Reg. Sess. (La. 2018). 108 H.B. 1423, 2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Md. 2018). 109 S.B. 7507C § 296-d, subpart E, 2017-2018 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. 2018). 110 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. 632-A (2018). 111 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. 612-A (2018). 112 ACT 183, H.707, 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). 113 H.B. 1228, 2020 Reg. Sess. (Va. 2020). 114 S.B. 3, § 15, 2019 Gen. Assemb. (Conn. 2019). 115 A8421, § 14, 2019-2020 Reg. Sess. (N.Y. 2019). 116 S.B. 726, § 3, 80th Leg., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019). 117 S.B. 479, 80th Leg., 2019 Reg. Sess. (Or. 2019). 118 S.B. 405, 100th Gen. Assemb. (Ill. 2018). 119 H.B. 524, 2018 Reg. Sess. (La. 2018). 120 S.B. 7507C § 296-d, subpart E, 2017-2018 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. 2018). 121 S.B. 7507C § 296-d, subpart A, 2017-2018 Leg. Sess. (N.Y. 2018). 122 H.B. 2759, 65th Leg., 2018 Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2018). 123 S.B. 6471, 65th Leg., 2018 Reg. Sess. (Wash. 2018). 124 S.B. 1343, § 1(a)(1), 2017-2018 Reg. Sess. (Cal. 2018). 125 H. Substitute No. 1 for H.B. 360, 149th Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Del. 2018). 126 H.B. 138, 100th Gen. Assemb., 2nd Reg. Sess. (Ill. 2018). 127 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. No. 614-A. (2018). 128 ACT 183, H.707, § 5(a), 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018). 129 LA. ACT 706, H.B. 899, 2018 Reg. Sess. (La. 2018). 130 New York, N.Y., Stop Sexual Harassment In NYC Act, Int. No. 613-A (2018). 131 ACT 183, H.707, 2017-2018 Gen. Assemb., Reg. Sess. (Vt. 2018).

PAGE 24